discuss: Re: Waiting on me, huh?
Subject:
Re: Waiting on me, huh?
From:
"s. keeling" ####@####.####
Date:
1 Jul 2004 16:57:40 -0000
Message-Id: <20040701165339.GF11965@infidel.spots.ab.ca>
Incoming from Kurt Swendson:
> After examining the cvs view page, I saw that you have done the
> language review on my howto quite a while ago.
Whoops. And you replied a while ago. Sorry.
> I have completed the suggested changes. Well, all except one - your
> comment in the abstract says "what is lam" and I did not change that
> because the document does describe what lam is. Just like the
> document describes what beowulf is, etc. Is that agreeable? In order
> to keep the abstract brief, I did not clutter it up with definitions.
I tend to resent running into an acronym before having seen its
definition. Brevity in the abstract does nothing for me if I have no
idea what it's saying. However, I consider this your document; I'm
not trying to tell you what to write. The ultimate product reflects
more on you than anyone else, so it's you who has to be happy with it.
> In order to get this thing going, I have put the changes on my
> website http://lam32767.tripod.com/wolf.xml, and appeal to you to get
> the changes there and submit them to CVS.
I will get that and go over it. Last time I looked, I was having no
difficulty with cvs.
> Also, in case I am not supposed to reply directly to you regarding
> the language review, please forward to the appropriate person. I
No, replies to me are fine. Very sorry for the delay on my end.
Life. :-P
--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling
- -
